See the TV News Reports at the top of the Sidebar below to the right, just below this links section....and click on the photos!


  • John Fox & Clemon Williams vs. Kern High School District, Whistleblowing to the FBI Re: Garland Purchase Orders, Bakersfield, California, 2013
  • GSA vs. Tremco, Qui Tam Suit, 2013
  • Los Angeles vs. Garland, Re: Bid Collusion, Racketeering, etc., Los Angeles, California, About 1997
  • Quality Tile Roofing vs. Tremco Roofing, Re: False Fraud Charges leveled at Tremco Certified Contractor for not bidding Tremco products at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Boise, Idaho, About 1997

Monday, June 29, 2009

Excuses, Excuses: Legal "Rationale" Tremco Uses to Annihilate the Competition

The most blatant statement yet regarding Tremco's intent to annihilate competition is clearly laid out in a memo that concludes how to use "...solicitation provisions so restrictive as to result in a de facto sole source procurement." 

It is certainly the attitude seen and shown in their In-house training documents in 1991. Never ending.... But this memo is from 2004 - and we hear even today that Tremco tells people that they no longer use the same tactics as outlined in their 1991 document. 


The memo defines how to use a Patent in combination with "...Government minimum needs" which allows the desired sole-sourcing to take place. 

Let's see, the patent is for what? (pending at the time of the memo) Was that for a Tremco Performance Warranty that does what?

Let's hear that again.

Patenting an idea that is basically a scam (defined as such by the New Jersey State Commission of Investigation)? Wow! 

 And then it seems that they try to circumvent the law even further by patenting a "Facilities Performance Warranty"? 

 Who's kidding who??? 

 So here is the Memo - this is legal beauty based on a scam!: